Here's a better question: why are we even having this debate? For 16 years the nonprofit National Women's History Museum, Inc. has worked to raise private funds for the project. The group has found high profile support in the likes of actress Meryl Streep as well as legislative champions. There are already 11 museums on the National Mall. So where's the controversy? In 2010 two senators blocked a resolution to set aside land for the Museum stating that the organization had raised insufficient funds and that "the new institution would duplicate more than 100 similar museums." Penny Nance, CEO of "Concerned Women for America" (presumably they meant women concerned for America), requested a hold on the bill, fearing that the museum would "focus on abortion rights without featuring any of the many contributions of the pro-life movement in America." Nance accused the NWHM's board member of having a history with the pro-choice movement; the idea that those interested in creating a forum to honor the history of women in our country might logically support women's rights seems not to have crossed her mind. But that's besides the point, as the museum does not yet exist to have its contents scrutinized. 

The NWHM website currently hosts a number of online exhibits dedicated to entrepreneurs, immigrants, activists and politicians among others. In 2012 an investigation by the Huffington Post discovered severe conflicts of interest and generally inept leadership within the organization, which they claimed has been primarily responsible for the lack of success. Following the investigation NWHM made a number of institutional changes.

There are currently two bills in limbo which would allocate land for the museum. They have received unanimous consent on separate occasions, but not in both wings of congress during a single session. So the problem seems to be that it's not being prioritized.

Are there any good reasons to forestall a women's history museum? No, there aren't. The National Gallery of Arts and the African American History Museum and The Native American History Museum etc.- all of these are represented elsewhere, so the argument that there are already women's histories museums goes right out the window. This is a project worthy of public funding, but there isn't any needed! The government needs only to consent.

When we write a demographic out of our history- not merely the marginalization of that demographic but by sin of marginalization their general history as well- a void is formed in the consciousness of our past. As intelligent, cultured people we have a stake in the complete representation of our history. As Americans we have a duty.